The Ban Forest

We will change the height limitation to apply to banned agents only, but the limit will be raised to the maximum so it includes sky boxes, tree houses, and other high altitude builds.

Your post is the first I have hear of there being a difference..

Monolithic?

Anti-Griefing Features and Tools
In case you missed it, since there are many questions about how we plan to support Residents in responding to griefers, here are some of the things we are working on:

1. There will be an icon on each Residen'ts profile which will show 3 states. The first state will equal Anonymous. This person has chosen not to give us any identifying information beyond the minimum required to create an account. The second state will indicate that we have some identifying information, but that it has not been verified. The third state will indicate that we have identifying information, and have verified it through a successful transaction.

A second phase of this effort will be the addition of LSL calls allowing you to access this information for your use so that a landowner, for example, could prohibit access to their parcel/estate based on level of identifying information available. Similarly, a merchant could make a decision about selling.

2. We will change the height limitation to apply to banned agents only, but the limit will be raised to the maximum so it includes sky boxes, tree houses, and other high altitude builds.

3. As mentioned earlier, we will extend the mute tools to allow you to not only ban someone from your land and ignore them, but also their objects and sounds. We're also exploring the feasibility of making YOU invisible to THEM, to eliminate stalking behavior.

4. There are a few script calls that are at the root of the majority of griefing. Landowners will be able to disable those scripts on their parcels, similar to checking 'no fly' or 'no build'. One key example: llPush, typically used for 'orbiting'

Other ideas, including a reputation system, are much further out. Our immediate concern is to focus on the tools which will give you the most control in the short term.

If individual, explicit, 'named' bans shut off when we weren't there, there would be a real issue.

With a high fence only for banned individuals, and a hoped for number of sims in the millions, they'd best be working on a slightly higher maximum number of people on the banned list than 50. Like several thousand at least.

Whew - aint that the truth.

Anyone that's been by the Shelter knows that we're anything but antisocial. Probably the other end of the extreme, to the point that if you're in a grumpy mood, we'll probably annoy the hell out of you with our stepford cheeriness

That said, our ban list has already surpassed 50. Just today, we were forced to make 6 avatars 'go away', and while its admittedly been a short time since the floodgates were opened, so far it appears to be increasing, not leveling off.

Several thousand indeed.

Flashmobs would occur when the news had a story about, oh, say, a looting spree somewhere. Instead of just the local crowd on the scene going nuts and misbehaving, thousands and thousands of people would teleport in and go nuts and misbehave.

After the ban lines were raised to 200m, it became apparent to me that Prokofy was correct to expect a forest of red and green lines when p2p was implemented. It just wasn't so glaringly obvious when the ban heights were ineffective.

But, I was also right to argue that the forest wouldn't be so thick based on the assumption that people are not so antisocial. They're not. What I've noticed lately is that the hundreds of banned parcels I'm bouncing off all day every day are generally unoccupied. Furthermore, the owners are inworld, in heaps of green dots, socializing. So why are we fenced into narrow flight corridors?

Two reasons, people are too ill mannered to ban their land only when they're actually there and want to be left alone; and LL have not provided a reasonably easy method to compensate for the general lack of manners by making ban and allow lists only effective when people are actually on the property.

How many of you would tier down and cancel your accounts in a fit of holy rage if LL changed the ban and allow lists to only operate when the owner, or a group member, was using the property?

Yummy! People pudding!

"Honey, dont open the secure room today, it kind of wreaks and its leaking red stuff."
==Chris

Reason one: we aren't bad mannered to take ban lines down when we aren't present, but it IS rude to demand we take an extra step to make your life easier. Just fly around and shaddap.

I won't teir down, but at the same time, I won't stop using my security orb no matter how high the ban lines go. I want 'access list only' around my skybox. Unless the 'whitelist' was ceiling too, I won't have that without a security orb.

Reason one: we aren't bad mannered to take ban lines down when we aren't present, but it IS rude to demand we take an extra step to make your life easier. Just fly around and shaddap.

I won't teir down, but at the same time, I won't stop using my security orb no matter how high the ban lines go. I want 'access list only' around my skybox. Unless the 'whitelist' was ceiling too, I won't have that without a security orb.

Hopefully they had the system working better that the one in "The Fly".

It's been decades since I read the ones I'm thinking about, I can hardly remember them. Larry Niven is the author.

One thing I found interesting was taking the rotational velocity of the teleportees into account. If you teleport from the equator to the north or south pole, and your velocity is teleported along with your mass, you will come out of the teleporter with a velocity different from your surroundings. That might lead to people pudding. Well enough off topic.

Your thinking the stepping disk systems on the puppeteer worlds, and transfer booths on earth.

Privacy while not present ranks with general anonymity. LL can't expect anyone to consider using the software for anything other than general recreation and gaming as long as it facilitates a culture of anonymity. Or maybe they can, people do still believe that they're anonymous on the web and that their email is private. Electric sheep we are.